FreeBSD on Rackspace Could

[Aryeh Friedman]

oops should of said the main disadvantage is it is not FreeBSD

On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 9:49 AM, Aryeh Friedman
<aryeh.friedman at gmail.com> wrote:
> For us it is mostly cost but the other advantage (with RS at least) is
> you can size the "hardware" to fit your needs and not get any more
> then you need... for example when we first started our consulting firm
> back in July we bought 256MB of RAM (RS sizes the Disk, CPU,
> Bandwidth, etc. as a multiple of RAM) and then moved to 512MB in Sept.
> and except for the 10 mins it took for RS to transfer our server image
> from a 1U VM to a 2U VM (1U = 256MB/RAM) the move was completely
> painless and no time and effort was needed to update the OS, 3rd party
> apps, our custom made code, etc....
>
> Like I said early the only downside of using RS as our primary server
> provider (even though we use it for internal development only [but
> since each of the 3 partners lives in a different part of the US it is
> much cheaper and easier then having it in one of our houses because
> none of our ISP's allow static IP's for non-business users which is
> twice the cost almost])
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Tom Worster <fsb at thefsb.org>
> Date: Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 9:34 AM
> Subject: Re: FreeBSD on Rackspace Could
> To: dalescott at shaw.ca
> Cc: FreeBSD <freebsd-questions at freebsd.org>
>
>
> On 11/13/10 6:32 PM, "dalescott at shaw.ca" <dalescott at shaw.ca> wrote:
>
>>> but dedicated/vps does not offer what cloud computing does.
>>
>>What do feel are the advantages of the cloud?
>
> i haven't used one yet but, as far as i can tell, the interesting
> differences derive from how the could platform implements network, storage
> and compute elements in a distributed hardware system meshed up with a
> mesh interconnect (presumably of the high-performance computing type).
>
> the resulting advantages for me: the storage arrays are raid 10 and all
> their responsibility not mine; shared file systems are part of the
> platform so i don't need to mess around with nfs; load balancing (which i
> currently can't afford) is part of the network platform; so is the address
> juggling needed for high availability (failover and restoration); and the
> price for each vm seems to allow me maybe 2 or 3x as many hosts as i get
> with dedicated servers so i can separate the db servers from the rest of
> the app and assign no more memory than i need to each vm.
>
> in summary, it seems i can get the high-availability, load-sharing
> architecture i want at a price that's beyond my budget with dedicated
> hosts.
>
> and it looks like there's a bunch of other nice aspects that aren't
> radical but will be time savers: backups, standby images, simpler sysadmin
> (there's a lot less to a cloud server "slice" than a whole computer),
> monitoring, persistence.
>
> does this begin to answer your question?
>
>
> this weekend i tried out gentoo on a wee celeron box i have. (someone here
> said gentoo was the linux most like freebsd and rackspace cloud offers
> it). it's the first linux experience i've had in which i didn't feel like
> a clumsy incompetent. the similarities and differences relative to freebsd
> are interesting. maybe i'll write up my initial impressions.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>